Tag: rating: a minus

MAC Her Cocoa Eyeshadow Quad ($44.00 for 0.19 oz.) is a new and limited edition palette from the upcoming RiRi Hearts MAC (Fall Edition) that launches at MAC stores on September 26th, online on September 30th, and counters and international locations on October 3rd.

Edited at 9/18 at 10:24AM PST: It features four eyeshadows, and the eyeshadows do not have names (only the actual quad has a name). Originally, the shades were listed with working names (so they are not finalized and often serve as placeholders). When I wrote the review, I swatched each shade to the corresponding working name (because they were permanent shades) to try to determine if, in fact, they were the same. I’ve kept that information below, but I wanted to update and clarify based on information I received this morning. I also received official shade descriptions and corresponding finishes, which I’ve added to the shades below.

To that end, I swatched each supposedly permanent shade against the individual, permanent eyeshadow I had previously (some of mine are quite old, so you may find quality differences even when colors are similar). I’ve included these swatches below for your reference. The one that really stuck out as being quite different was “Retrospeck,” which is a deeper gold with orange tones in this palette but a muted gold in the permanent range.

Her Cocoa #1 is described as a “bright bronze gold [with a Lustre finish].” It is a sparkling gold with strong orange undertones and some copper shimmer. It actually somewhat resembles Retrospeck #2, which was another shade labeled as Retrospeck but did not look anything like the permanent shade. The finish did seem like a Lustre finish, though–a little sparkly/gritty. It had fairly good color payoff, though, and felt soft and smooth, but it seemed to have some fall out throughout the day. Urban Decay Blunt is lighter. MAC Barefoot is more muted. Estee Lauder Bronze Dunes #5 is less sparkly. bareMInerals Surreal is less orange. See comparison swatches.

Her Cocoa #3 is a “warm antique gold [with a Veluxe Pearl finish].” It is a warm-toned, medium-dark brown with a frosted sheen. It had good color payoff, and the texture was soft and smooth. It was easy to blend on the eye. This was listed as Woodwinked per my information, but Woodwinked is actually grayer with a stronger sheen and a noticeable gray cast, whereas Her Cocoa #3 is noticeably warmer, almost orange-red in tone, and has a different sheen altogether. My Woodwinked, for the record, is probably five or six years old, so it could have changed over the years as well. This shade wore well with very faint fading after eight hours. Urban Decay A mbush is darker. MAC Romantico is less frosted. MAC Lie Low is darker, less frosted. MAC Woodwinked has a grayer cast, more golden sheen. See comparison swatches.

Her Cocoa #4 is described as a “chocolate bronze [with a Lustre finish].” It is a dark brown with warm, reddish undertones with gold and bronze shimmer for a frosted finish. It had good pigmentation, and it applied smoothly and evenly. This is what was listed as Mulch in my information, and at the very best, Her Cocoa #4 is a smidgen darker, and it was only noticeable under a lot of light. It wore well for just over eight hours. MAC Divine Decadence is less frosted. Urban Decay West is darker. MAC Mulch is dead-on when I swatched the two side-by-side. MAC Buckwheat is browner. See comparison swatches.

MAC RiRi Woo Pro Longwear Lip Pencil ($21.50 for 0.04 oz.) is described as a “cool red cream.” It’s a cool-toned, blue-based red with a matte finish. It was opaque on lips, and I was able to apply this shade evenly across the lips. The texture was barely creamy; enough that it did not scratch my lips, but it does tug and pull somewhat. It wore for eight and a half hours and was drying while worn. Urban Decay 69 is brighter. MAC Cherry is similar. MAC Freehand is also similar. See comparison swatches.

Talk That Talk Pro Longwear Lip Pencil ($21.50 for 0.04 oz.) is described as a “dark plum cream.” It’s a deep, dark, blackened plum. The color is interesting, because it’s really more of a berry-burgundy initially, but applying it to the lips in an effort to get more even/opaque color, resulted in the color turning into a blackened berry. The problem I had was the outer edge still looks quite berry-hued and nowhere near as dark. The consistency isn’t too creamy, but it is not the driest liner I’ve come across. It did not apply evenly. Make sure you don’t press your lips together (blot with tissue), as it can be a little tacky initially. It lasted for nine hours but was drying on its own. MAC Nightmoth is maybe a touch lighter, but it is similar. See comparison swatches.

RiRi Woo Lipstick doesn’t really need a lip liner, as it is so matte and clingy on its own, that it’s quite long-wearing and less prone to bleeding/feathering compared to other reds. If it does bleed or feather, then you may appreciate the addition of a matching lip liner. Talk That Talk Lipstick is better applied over the lip liner, as neither is great on its own, and together, they end up giving more even, opaque color.

MAC Nude Lipstick ($16.50 for 0.10 oz.) is described as a “cool nude cream [with a Matte finish].” It’s a medium-dark brown with a gray cast–almost slightly rosy-toned at certain angles–and a matte finish. It had opaque color coverage, and it felt very creamy, even for a matte (which is different than a Retro Matte!). It lasted for five hours and was neither drying nor hydrating. MAC Shitaki is warmer, shimmery. MAC Double Shot is warmer, richer. Guerlain Giny is much lighter. Bobbi Brown Uber Nude is rosier. See comparison swatches. I think MAC’s permanent range may have some similar shades to this, but I’m not familiar enough with some of the browner shades to say for sure, though.

Who’s That Chick Lipstick ($16.50 for 0.10 oz.) is described as a “mid-tone orange with frost [with a Frost finish].” It’s a brightened, medium orange with lighter tangerine orange shimmer and a frosted, partially metallic finish. It had semi-opaque color coverage where the shimmer seemed to cover everywhere, but there was some translucency. This shade had a very creamy, emollient consistency. The shimmer is really what makes this different than other orange lipsticks, as the shimmer is at the forefront and gave the overall color a lighter look. It lasted two and a half hours on me–it almost felt like it just slipped right off because of how creamy (but thin) it was! It didn’t seem drying or hydrating during that short period it was on for. MAC Tart & Trendy is less shimmery. Milani Sweet Nectar is less shimmery, darker. MAC Sounds Like Noise is less shimmery, lighter. OCC Electric Grandma is pinker. See comparison swatches.

It had mostly opaque color coverage; there was a slight translucency where the natural lip color comes through, but it is very slight. It had nice, even coverage, too, which can sometimes be an issue with bolder/darker glosses. Lipglass is a thicker formula with a tacky texture, and it is vanilla-scented. RiRi Woo felt less thick than the average Lipglass, but it is still felt thick overall. RiRi Woo (Lipglass) wore well for four and a half hours on me. It was neither drying nor hydrating.

The RiRi Hearts MAC (Fall Edition) launches in MAC stores on September 26th, online September 30th, and everywhere else October 3rd (including international).

It had good color payoff, and the texture was soft, finely-milled, and blendable on the skin. Depending on your skin tone, this may appear warmer and more orange than it does against mine (which seems to bring out the brown/beige tones). If you have a darker complexion, it may also not show up well, as I noticed that if I blended it out too much, I didn’t see the color. The sheen of the satin finish only comes forth if you really buff and work the color into the skin. It wore well for seven and a half hours, and after eight and a half hours, there was some patchiness.

The RiRi Hearts MAC (Fall Edition) launches in MAC stores on September 26th, online September 30th, and everywhere else October 3rd (including international).

It was opaque applied with rich, full color coverage. The consistency was very lightly creamy, but it was noticeably creamier compared to some other Illamasqua lipsticks in the range, which can sometimes drag or pull at the lip. It does tend to skip a little when I tried applying it from the tube, but it was barely noticeable. It wore incredibly well, topping in at six and a half hours, and then a stain that lingered for another two hours. While it had a distinct matte finish, it didn’t feel drying while I wore it (but not hydrating). If you have drier lips, you’ll definitely want to prep by both exfoliating and laying down balm about twenty to thirty minutes prior to applying this shade, though, as the drier, matte finish can be unforgiving if there are any flakes or dryness on the lips.

P.S. — I don’t see it on Sephora yet, but it should release there soon (hopefully).